+- [CVE-2018-16758](https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2018-16758):
+ Michael Yonli discovered that tinc 1.0.34 and earlier allow a [man-in-the-middle attack](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-in-the-middle_attack)
+ that, even if the MITM cannot decrypt the traffic sent between the two
+ endpoints, when the MITM can correctly predict when an ephemeral key exchange
+ message is sent in a TCP connection between two nodes, allows the MITM to
+ force one node to send UDP packets in plaintext.
+ The tinc 1.1pre versions are not affected by this.
+
+- [CVE-2018-16738](https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2018-16738):
+ Michael Yonli discoverd that tinc versions 1.0.30 to 1.0.34 allow an [oracle attack](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_attack),
+ similar to CVE-2018-16737, but due to the mitigations put in place for the Sweet32
+ attack in tinc 1.0.30, it now requires a [timing attack](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timing_attack)
+ that has only a limited time to complete.
+ Tinc 1.1pre16 and earlier are also affected if there are nodes on the same
+ VPN that still use the legacy protocol from tinc version 1.0.x.
+
+- [CVE-2018-16737](https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2018-16737):
+ Michael Yonly discovered that tinc 1.0.29 and earlier allow an [oracle attack](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_attack)
+ that could allow a remote attacker to establish one-way communication with a
+ tinc node, allowing it to send fake control messages and inject packets into
+ the VPN. The attack takes only a few seconds to complete.
+ Tinc 1.1pre14 and earlier allow the same attack if they are configured to allow connections
+ from nodes using the legacy 1.0.x protocol.
+